>
> The refrigerant police may not go after individuals but they do show up
> in auto shops. They will even bring in trick cars and try to get a shop
> to do cheapie conversions to catch them.
>

This is probably the salient point. No one who doesn't already deal with EPA
regulation and depend on a license to do their job (e.g. a shop that
services AC systems) has anything to really worry about. We schmoes have no
relevant permits to suspend of revoke, which is essentially the premise
under which such shops are policed. And while it's illegal in some states to
operate a vehicle with hydrocarbon refrigerant, there's really no way for
them to find out. While it is flammable, the danger is pretty minimal.
Compared to the 16 gallon molotov under the belly, a couple pounds of
quickly dispersed gaseous butane is nothing. Hydrocarbon refrigerant is
already used in Holland, France, Germany, Denmark, England, Australia,
Canada, China, Indonesia, and India. Not a single fire has ever been
reported in connection with a hydrocarbon refrigeration system. Besides, in
a fire situation a few seconds of gaseous fuel added to the fire is arguably
less dangerous than the combustion products of either R-12 (phosgene gas) or
R-134a (hydrogen fluoride gas). Given that an accident resulting in a leak
will cause all evidence of ANY refrigerant to quickly vanish, I seriously
doubt an insurance adjustor could credibly show that there was anything at
all in the system, much less a "prohibited refrigerant"-- unless maybe
you're so foolish as to admit it, or leave the empty duracool cans rolling
around in back. Personally, I think the anti-hydrocarbon refrigerant
position is based purely on legislative ignorance that automatically equates
"flammable" with "dangerous", with the "patented refrigerant lobby" perhaps
fanning the flames, so to speak.

--
John Bange
'90 Vanagon - "Geldsauger"